Flossing one's teeth is an activity that is critical for maintaining good dental health and hygiene. While brushing cleans the surface of the teeth, flossing is necessary to clean out the gaps between the teeth, where food and bacteria often gets caught and remain despite vigorous brushing of the front and rear surfaces of the teeth. Leaving food and bacteria in these gaps accelerates plaque build-up, and can lead to cavities, tooth decay, and gum disease. Left untreated, gum disease can lead to other severe health conditions, such as heart disease, diabetes, and a high body mass index. Bacteria caught between teeth also causes bad breath and may detract from the appearance of the teeth. Despite these serious consequences, flossing on regularly basis using the proper flossing tools and techniques is also one of the most difficult personal health habits for people to develop and incorporate into their daily health and grooming routines.
Dental floss was invented in 1815 by Levi Spear Parmly, a New Orleans dentist who advised his patients to use thin thread to clean between their teeth. Johnson and Johnson patented dental floss in 1898. At the time, it was made out of silk. Today, there are two basic types of dental floss: multifilament dental flosses, such as nylon and silk; and monofilament dental floss, which is generally made of some type of rubber, plastic or polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE). Nylon dental floss, which tends to be a lot cheaper, comes in a large variety of thicknesses and flavors, and can be bought with or without wax. Monofilament dental floss is a newer technology, and because it isn't a fabric like nylon, it resists ripping and tearing. Also, because monofilament flosses are stronger, many people feel that it is easier to use and pull between teeth. The plastic or rubber material in monofilament dental floss also seems to glide easier between the teeth for many people. Both types of dental floss are available in a variety of different flavors, including, for instance, mint, cinnamon, bubblegum, and even bacon. In addition, both types of dental floss are available in different thicknesses, which is important because different people can have significantly different amounts of space between their teeth. Dental tape, which is a wide, flat ribbon of nylon is another type of dental floss that may be obtained in waxed or un-waxed form. Dental tape is typically easier to insert between the teeth than traditional dental floss because it is generally thinner in one dimension.
The American Dental Association (ADA) recommends the following steps to help achieve maximum efficacy during flossing: (1) Break or cut off about an 18-inch length of dental floss; (2) Wind some of the length of dental floss around the middle finger of one hand; (3) Wind the remaining length of dental floss around the middle finger of the opposite hand, and use this finger to take up the dental floss up as it is used and becomes soiled; (4) Hold the dental floss tightly between the thumbs and forefingers and gently insert it between the teeth; (5) Curve the length of dental floss into a “C” shape against the side of the tooth and rub the dental floss gently up and down, keeping it pressed against the tooth; (6) Do not jerk or snap the dental floss; and (7) Repeat these steps for the rest of the teeth and do not neglect to floss behind the teeth in the rear areas of the mouth.
Anyone who has ever flossed using conventional dental floss knows that flossing, even with the ADA-recommended method, can be a difficult, messy and relatively unpleasant experience for some people. Maintaining a good grip on the dental floss while manipulating the dental floss to position fresh sections of dental floss between the teeth requires a substantial amount of time and attention, as well as a considerable amount of manual dexterity to carry out all of the ADA-recommended steps. The dental floss can be very uncomfortable to grip and use in accordance with the ADA-recommended procedure. Specifically, gripping the dental floss by winding it around the fingers can be very cumbersome and even painful for many users. This discomfort may be intensified by the fact that the dental floss must be squeezed tightly between the thumbs and forefingers to hold it in place between the teeth. It is also difficult to adjust or reposition the dental floss to use a different section of the dental floss because repositioning the floss requires unwinding and rewinding the dental floss around the user's fingers. In addition, gripping, repositioning and manipulating dental floss gradually becomes more and more difficult and uncomfortable during a flossing session as the dental floss gets wet with the user's saliva and/or rinsing.
Although there have been many meaningful advances in the materials, thicknesses, flavors and surface treatments for dental floss, there have been very few innovations over the past 200 years directed to making it any easier, cleaner and more comfortable for people to use dental floss on a regular and consistent basis. Flossing forks and flossing picks have been introduced in an attempt to make flossing less of a hassle for people. However, there are a number of significant disadvantages associated with using flossing forks and picks. First, flossing forks and picks generally do not permit users to select from the large variety of the aforementioned types of dental flosses available on the market today. Second, flossing forks and picks are not environmentally friendly because they require users to dispose of several plastic forks or picks with each flossing, contributing to the amount of plastic that ends up in landfills. Third, flossing forks and picks also tend to be much more expensive than dental floss. Most importantly, however, it is impossible to use flossing forks and picks for flossing and still meet the ADA's recommended efficacy standards for proper flossing because the recommended steps cannot be carried out effectively with anything other than a relatively freely moving and flexible length of dental floss that can easily be manipulated by the thumbs and fingers of each hand during flossing. Therefore, flossing forks and flossing picks are considered by the ADA to be ill-suited for proper flossing. Consequently, using dental floss remains the only approved and recommended method for interdental cleaning recommended by the American Dental Association (ADA).
Different users tend to have very different and very personalized techniques of gripping dental floss. Some users use the ADA-recommended method, while still many others grip the dental floss using the palm, hand, middle, ring and pinky fingers. In most cases, the thumbs and forefingers are used to guide, manipulate and position the dental floss while assisting in gripping. Modification of the grip usually does not necessarily impact the efficacy as long as the ADA-recommended steps can be performed. Nevertheless, when a typical eighteen inch strip of dental floss is used for each flossing session, as recommended by the ADA, only a small fraction is actually engaged with the teeth for flossing. The remainder is used solely for effective gripping of the dental floss and to compensate for the inefficient use of fresh sections of dental floss. Thus, due to the excessive amount of dental floss used solely to facilitate gripping the dental floss with the hands and fingers, there is a considerable amount of waste associated with using dental floss in the conventional ADA-approved manner. Another cause of waste is the difficulty in keeping track of used and unused sections of dental floss so that unused sections can be positioned between gaps in the teeth while flossing. Unused sections of the dental floss are frequently overlooked and discarded. As a result, it has been estimated that, out of the approximately 4 million miles of dental floss produced every year, approximately 2 million miles of it is wasted and ends up in landfills. Due to the large amount of dental floss wasted, the average user who flosses on a regular basis ends up purchasing and discarding twice as much dental floss as he or she actually needs.
The aforementioned challenges of flossing are further exacerbated by the overall messiness of the process. Current methods inevitably result in saliva, bacteria and unsightly blood and food particles coming into contact with the user's hands, fingers and palms. Frustratingly, dental floss cannot be rinsed like a toothbrush because the moisture makes it even more difficult to hold and control. As an alternative, many users resort to using a tissue to clean the dental floss which is not as effective as rinsing, and frequently requires that the user unwind the dental floss completely and then rewind it to establish a new grip. Trying to deal with these problems while flossing often just leads to bacteria, food particles and blood from the used sections of dental floss being re-introduced back into the mouth as the used sections are used to floss new areas of the mouth, reducing the overall efficacy of the entire process.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,435,330 to Dix discloses a dental flossing device comprising two ring portions for holding the dental floss. But each ring portion requires using specially formed segments of dental floss. Specifically, each segment of dental floss must include at each end of the segment a locking means comprising an enlarged portion of dental floss designed to engage with and be locked into a corresponding retaining means in the ring portions. U.S. Pat. No. 5,454,386 to Dix requires using a segment of dental floss having closed loops at either end. Therefore, both of Dix's dental flossing devices suffer from a significant disadvantage in that they cannot be used with ordinary, non-special, conventionally formed segments of floss. Moreover, neither one of Dix's dental flossing devices provides a mechanism for storing a supply of extra, unused dental floss on the rings.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,477,871 to Sanchez attempts to address the disadvantages of Dix's dental flossing devices by providing sidewalls with an annular space therebetween for winding and storing extra dental floss, as well as one or more slots in one of the sidewalls to facilitate tying or wedging dental floss thereto. However, Sanchez's flossing device suffers from other significant disadvantages. One disadvantage is that manually tying the floss to the slots in the sidewall is both cumbersome and difficult. Another disadvantage is that wrapping a sufficient amount of floss over the free end of the floss wedged into the slot in the sidewall in order to provide enough friction to retain the floss on the ring during a flossing operation requires dedicating a large amount of floss (relative to the amount actually used for flossing) solely to the function of securing the floss to the ring. The relatively large amount of floss used solely for securing the floss to the ring is therefore wasted and contributes to the large amount of floss that ends up being discarded and sent to landfills.
Accordingly, there is considerable need in the field of dental flossing devices for a dental flossing device that does not require using sections of dental floss having specially formed ends and does not require wrapping multiple loops of extra dental floss around the storage and dispensing ring solely for the purpose of securing the dental floss to the storage and dispensing ring.